Margaret Irvine was a widow who lived alone Two men have been ordered to serve at least 25 years in jail for the murder of a 91-year-old woman in her home.Patrick Docherty, 41, and Brendan Dixon, 36, were found guilty of killing Margaret Irvine in Galston, Ayrshire, during a botched robbery in 2003.Lord Hardie said the "wickedly reckless and truly evil" crime was "beyond the comprehension of all decent people".He jailed the pair for life after they were convicted by a jury at the High Court in Kilmarnock.He ordered that they must serve 25 years before they will be eligible to apply for parole.The case against a third man, 32-year-old James Miller, was found not proven.

Brendan Dixon had 30 previous convictionsThe frail pensioner, who lived alone, was bound and beaten before a duster was shoved in her mouth and a pillowcase pulled over her head.She was found lying on her bed by her home-help hours after she was murdered on 28 September, 2003.The four-week trial heard that Docherty and Dixon broke into Mrs Irvine's home on Barward Road, switched off the electricity and struggled with the pensioner.They then tied her hands behind her back with a belt and punched her on the head and body.Mrs Irvine died of asphyxiation after a duster was forced into her mouth.It is time that people realised that it is not for them to call into question or to comment to jurors after a verdictLord HardieDocherty, of Hillcrest, Bellsbank, Dalmellington, and Dixon, whose address was given as Kilmarnock prison, denied the charges.Both men lodged special defences of alibi and claimed they were elsewhere at the time of the murder.Passing sentence, Lord Hardie said: "Your actions defy description and were beyond the comprehension of all decent people."He said the pair had attacked Mrs Irvine in "the sanctity of her own home" with a view to robbing her of her life savings."Such an assault is properly described as wickedly reckless," he said.

Friday, 13 July 2007

The following press coverage shows conclusively that the DNA and Footprint found in this case does not match any of the Accused.Strange how Crown want to rely on such evidence to convict but when the shoe is on the other foot the evidence of DNA and Foootprints not matching is cast aside?

Nephew of tragic Margaret angry at bid to free jail duoMar 9 2007THE nephew of a murdered pensioner has slammed a campaign to free the men convicted of her killing.Charles Keers was living next door to his 91-year-old aunt, Margaret Irvine, in Barward Road, Galston, when she was killed in September 2003 in what is thought to have been a botched robbery attempt.And he was himself a witness in the High Court trial which led to two Ayrshire men being jailed for life.Patrick Docherty, 43, of Dalmellington, and Brendan Dixon, 38, of Kilmarnock, were each ordered to serve a minimum of 25 years after a jury found them guilty of murder.A murder charge against a third man — Colin Miller, 34, from Galston — was found not proven.Now a campaign — backed by the Miscarriage of Justice Organisation — has been launched to have the two released.But Mr Keers, 50, said that he was convinced that they were guilty.“I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever,” he said. “I am 100 per cent certain.”Mr Keers, who still lives in Galston, said that a leaflet produced by the campaigners, titled ‘Free the Kilmarnock 2’, had left him “annoyed and upset”.“They even sent one to my local pub,” he said. “People were afraid to tell me because they knew I would be upset.”Mr Keers was himself extensively questioned after the murder.“I have no problem with that,” he said, “they had to cover every angle.”The leaflet issued by campaigners for Dixon and Docherty claims the case against them was “based on hearsay and circumstantial evidence”.Much of the key prosecution evidence during the five-week trial at the High Court in Kilmarnock consisted of admissions Dixon and Docherty were alleged to have made to third parties.No forensic evidence was found which could be linked to any of the accused.The co-founder of the Miscarriage of Justice Organisation, John McManus, said: “I have serious doubts about this case. I normally wouldn’t be so quick to jump in, but I do think these guys are innocent.”And Kevin Donald claimed that there was fresh evidence in the case, which is expected to go to appeal in May or June.

The above appeal has been postponed because of the lack of and refusal of Crown to disclose Key evidence not heard at original trial.There is a time set for a hearing for disclosure which again delays the Appeal date somewhat and in the meantime two Innocent men languish in Prison

Thursday, 5 July 2007

In response to my letters of complaint, Clearly this response shows that our Justice Department clearly Are Not Interested.

Dear Mr DonaldThank you for your e-mail of 30 May 2007 addressed to the First Minister about your brother-in law, Mr Brendan Dixon. I have been asked to reply as the Scottish Executive is responsible for the way in which the justice system addresses potential miscarriages of justice.If someone has been convicted of a crime in a Scottish court and they believe that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred in respect of that conviction or in relation to the sentence imposed, then they should contact the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. The Commission’s role is to review and investigate cases where it is alleged that a miscarriage of justice may have occurred in relation to conviction, sentence or both.If you feel that the Commission may be able to assist in your nephew’s case you should submit an application to the Commission. You can download an application form from their website www.sccrc.org.uk or you can request a form by contacting them at Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, Portland House, 5th Floor, 17 Renfield Street, Glasgow, G2 5AH, telephone number 0141 270 7030.Integrity is the absolute cornerstone of modern day policing and I know that the Scottish police service is fully committed to tackling all aspects and allegations of corruption and misconduct. The Police (Scotland) Act 1967, which clearly defines the roles of Scottish Ministers and Chief Constables, also makes it clear that Chief Constables are entirely responsible for operational matters affecting their force including complaints. Neither Scottish Ministers nor the Scottish Executive has any place to intervene or comment on individual cases. Any issues you wish to raise with the Chief Constable, Strathclyde Police, 173 Pitt Street, GLASGOW, G2 4JS, will be taken very seriously by the police. If this is not your area police force, you can find further information at http://www.scottish.police.uk/mainframe.htmAlternatively, you may wish to contact the Area Procurator Fiscal if you suspect that a police officer has behaved in a corrupt manner. Details of the Procurator Fiscal Service in your area can be gathered by visiting the following hyperlink: http://www.crownoffice.gov.uk/About/Departmental-Overview/Area-Procurator-Fiscal/APFIndexI hope this reply is helpful.Yours sincerelyELEANOR McLEANCriminal Justice Directorate Criminal Law & Licensing Division, GW.15 St Andrews House Regent Road Edinburgh EH1 3DG Tel: 0131-244 2216

Tuesday, 3 July 2007

freethekillie2Joined: 27 Apr 2007Posts: 77Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 6:48 am Post subject:[this is some words out of lord hardies report] examination of the scene by police officers, forensic scientists and the pathologist disclosed that the electricity had been switched off at the main switch located in a kitchen cupboard . the kitchen was the first room to which access was obtained after entering the unlocked side door of the house. the telephone downstairs had also been disconnected and the zimmer, which was always located at the foot of the stairs to enable mrs irvine to use it there when she came of the stair lift, had been moved away from the area so it could not be used in those circumstances. each of the rooms showed signs of an intruder or intruders having opened drawers and jewellery boxes and having moved items. althought the intruders had been in each room of the house there was a locked wardrobe in the spare room. police officers found a key for this wardrobe and upon opening it discovered a bag containing a pink make up bag, an envelope and a cardboard holder each of which contained sums of money. in total there was £8,150. mrs irvine it was stated was robbed 6 weeks before and anything of importance was stolen. as i have stated on this forum police found purses under a slab in a garden in galston, one of which belonged to mrs irvine from the first robbery in july. also stated is brendans willingness to take a lie detector test, there are many witnesses never called to give evidence that could have undermined the crowns case.

Legal ruling set to delay city courts

HUNDREDS of cases at Scotland's busiest district court could be delayed following a legal ruling over the failure of prosecutors to disclose statements to defence lawyers.At Glasgow District Court Stipendiary Magistrate Alan Findlay ordered the procurator fiscal to hand over statements and police notebooks in an assault and breach of the peace trial.Stirling defence lawyer Virgil Crawford had argued the failure to do so, despite repeated requests, had breached the human rights of the two accused men.advertisementThis week, after hearing extensive legal arguments, Stipendiary Magistrate Findlay ruled the defence lawyer was entitled to see the missing statements, police notebooks and details of previous convictions of witnesses.He ordered the prosecution to produce them "without delay", but granted them leave to appeal.The trial of the two accused, which should have been heard this month, has been put off until October 10.Afterwards, Mr Crawford said: "Disclosure is happening in every district court except Glasgow."Here, the procurator fiscal's attitude is that if the prosecution has to work with the same statements from the police as the defence, what does it matter?"That is not good enough. Under European Human Rights legislation the Crown is obliged to hand over all statements to the defence, particularly if they are requested."The implication of the ruling is that if every lawyer takes this particular human rights point he or she will win it, so trials could be further delayed for months while disclosure is carried out."Earlier this year, when told the Crown had not handed over statements in a murder case, High Court judge, Lord Hardie, described the failure as an "act of defiance" and threatened to hold Lord Advocate Elish Angiolini in contempt of court.Publication date 11/05/07

Thu 21 Dec 2006Printer friendlySend to friendComments (2)Murder suspects freed on bail after Crown's witness statement errorARNOT MCWHINNIEFOUR brothers accused of murder were freed on bail yesterday after the Crown failed to provide more than 100 witness statements to the defence.The High Court in Glasgow heard that some of the 121 statements, which remained undisclosed by prosecutors until the trial began, could have been of major importance.The judge, Lord Bracadale, called a temporary halt to the proceedings and set the four brothers free on bail pending a new trial early next year.Friends and relatives of 29-year-old Michael Lynch, of Kennedar Drive, Linthouse, who was allegedly stabbed to death by the four brothers and another man who was already on bail, were furious as the accused walked from court.A family friend, who asked not to be named, said: "It is beyond belief that a mistake by the Crown should allow the four accused, who have been in custody on a murder charge since the end of June, to be freed."They will doubtless enjoy a better Christmas dinner than they would have in custody."Yesterday's case was the third murder trial in a few weeks to hit the buffers for the same non- disclosure reasons.The problem was first identified last month in a trial before Lord Hardie, who made a legal order requiring the Crown to hand all statements in the case to the defence team within 24 hours. When the Crown failed to do so, the furious judge threatened to hold Scotland's new Lord Advocate, Elish Angiolini, QC, in contempt of court for what he described as an "apparent act of defiance".He was told that the Crown had no failsafe system of checking statements to be disclosed.Yesterday, Lord Bracadale - who had earlier described the Crown's failings as "lamentable" - told the jury who had sat since last week without hearing any evidence that they were being discharged. He said: "Statements are usually disclosed at an early stage well before the trial."In this case, there has been a serious breakdown in arrangements and a vast amount of material has been produced by the Crown after the start of the trial."He told jurors: "The experience is likely to leave you with a poor view of our criminal justice system in operation, but it is rare for cases to go as badly off the rails as this case did."The prosecutor, Peter Hammond, revealed that a working party involving police and Crown officials was currently trying to develop a new system to ensure disclosure in all future cases.The five men accused of murdering Mr Lynch near his home on June 23 this year are Christopher Donohoe, 16, and brothers Craig Hulley, 21, Graham, 19, Mark, 18, and Andrew, 16. In granting them bail, Lord Bracadale ordered that the brothers were tagged and under curfew between the hours of 7pm and 7am.